Film reviews by nationality

Sunday, October 12, 2008

As you're all aware, I've been questioning since this summer my interest for politics. Where am I after all of this? Obviously, though I still keep myself posted about what's going on in politics, I'm just not as interested by it as I used to be. This in part due not just to the way politicians tarnish politics, but also to the way our media covers politics as a whole.

Speaking about the media, what makes me less inclined to share with you my opinions on politics? Here are the main reasons:

Bad research. While political journalism and "columnism" (if that word exists) in English Canada is relatively top-notch, the same thing can't be said about Quebec's media. In fact, most of Quebec's political columnists, though they can be better, don't do enough research to support what they say. Here are some examples. In Quebec, most political columnists think that Canada is a secular country (let me laugh!). Secondly, in a footage of Radio-Canada (the French-speaking equivalent of CBC), while Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, was labelled by a journalist (not a columnist, mind you!) as a "progressist", Michelle Bachelet, the president of Chile, was labelled as a "moderate progressist". I'm sorry, but is state interventionism at all cost - no matter what you do - an absolute requirement to be seen under a nice day? Thirdly, many Quebecker journalists believe that no movies and TV series are produced in English Canada (no offence, but those who said that should give me their journalism certificate). Fourthly, while some newspapers and media outlets of English Canada took the time to expose Obama's and McCain's political ideas, Quebec media (no surprise here) concentrated mostly on Obama's public image (i.e. charisma).

Excessive focus on polls. Seriously, do I need to read at least three times a week in the same newspaper how "popular" a political party is? Unlike a hockey column where you may say whatever you want on a team (its offencive or defencive improvements or regression, for instance), the same thing can't necessarily be said about an analysis of a poll. For instance, what explains the "popularity" of the Liberals, for example? Well, it seems that the only explanations that pollsters can give you is this (a fictitious broadcasted dialogue): "You know Pierre [Bruneau], says Jean-Marc Léger, the Liberals are extremely popular in the centre and the West of Montreal (no, you're kidding?!!??). However, as you move outside of the Island, you notice that the Tories put up a good fight. Besides in some rural areas, Harper has a good chance of making a breakthrough." Dude, I don't give a business about a party's regional popularity; is it too much to ask from our "pundits" to analyze a party's ideas?

Excessive focus on insults between politicians. Whether you read an English Canadian or a Quebecker newspaper, you often see a big coverage of an insult that a politician threw at the other. Is it seriously important? As far as I'm concerned, insults thrown between politicians should only be the object of a small snippet.

So, I hereby announce you that my blog will now be a cultural blog. Ha, ha, I can hear some people say that they'll no longer read my blog. Rest assured, when I'll feel like doing it, I WILL post something on politics. Thus, what should you mostly expect from me in the future? Movie reviews along with news on what's going in the movie and the television industry. Of course, from time to time, I will share with you a few thoughts on what I've read (books).

Finally, let me tell you that although my interest for politics did wane a little bit, it's always been a pleasure for me to share with you my views on politics. Of course, even though that blog has often created some controversies, I will always be thankful to my friends Léonard and SC (and other unmentioned people) for 1) always expressing their disagreement without making hasty judgement of personal values (ex: You advocate French-style secularism? Rot in hell, you @$£*& Jacobin!); and 2) showing their support for this blog (even though they mostly don't agree with the content).

To all my readers (present and potential), welcome to the second version of my blog. I hope that you'll like the new orientation that the blog took. Who knows? Maybe a movie review of mine has the potential to make you react more or less the same way some of my political views do ;-)

As you're all aware, I've been questioning since this summer my interest for politics. Where am I after all of this? Obviously, though I still keep myself posted about what's going on in politics, I'm just not as interested by it as I used to be. This in part due not just to the way politicians tarnish politics, but also to the way our media covers politics as a whole.

Speaking about the media, what makes me less inclined to share with you my opinions on politics? Here are the main reasons:

Bad research. While political journalism and "columnism" (if that word exists) in English Canada is relatively top-notch, the same thing can't be said about Quebec's media. In fact, most of Quebec's political columnists, though they can be better, don't do enough research to support what they say. Here are some examples. In Quebec, most political columnists think that Canada is a secular country (let me laugh!). Secondly, in a footage of Radio-Canada (the French-speaking equivalent of CBC), while Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, was labelled by a journalist (not a columnist, mind you!) as a "progressist", Michelle Bachelet, the president of Chile, was labelled as a "moderate progressist". I'm sorry, but is state interventionism at all cost - no matter what you do - an absolute requirement to be seen under a nice day? Thirdly, many Quebecker journalists believe that no movies and TV series are produced in English Canada (no offence, but those who said that should give me their journalism certificate). Fourthly, while some newspapers and media outlets of English Canada took the time to expose Obama's and McCain's political ideas, Quebec media (no surprise here) concentrated mostly on Obama's public image (i.e. charisma).

Excessive focus on polls. Seriously, do I need to read at least three times a week in the same newspaper how "popular" a political party is? Unlike a hockey column where you may say whatever you want on a team (its offencive or defencive improvements or regression, for instance), the same thing can't necessarily be said about an analysis of a poll. For instance, what explains the "popularity" of the Liberals, for example? Well, it seems that the only explanations that pollsters can give you is this (a fictitious broadcasted dialogue): "You know Pierre [Bruneau], says Jean-Marc Léger, the Liberals are extremely popular in the centre and the West of Montreal (no, you're kidding?!!??). However, as you move outside of the Island, you notice that the Tories put up a good fight. Besides in some rural areas, Harper has a good chance of making a breakthrough." Dude, I don't give a business about a party's regional popularity; is it too much to ask from our "pundits" to analyze a party's ideas?

Excessive focus on insults between politicians. Whether you read an English Canadian or a Quebecker newspaper, you often see a big coverage of an insult that a politician threw at the other. Is it seriously important? As far as I'm concerned, insults thrown between politicians should only be the object of a small snippet.

So, I hereby announce you that my blog will now be a cultural blog. Ha, ha, I can hear some people say that they'll no longer read my blog. Rest assured, when I'll feel like doing it, I WILL post something on politics. Thus, what should you mostly expect from me in the future? Movie reviews along with news on what's going in the movie and the television industry. Of course, from time to time, I will share with you a few thoughts on what I've read (books).

Finally, let me tell you that although my interest for politics did wane a little bit, it's always been a pleasure for me to share with you my views on politics. Of course, even though that blog has often created some controversies, I will always be thankful to my friends Léonard and SC (and other unmentioned people) for 1) always expressing their disagreement without making hasty judgement of personal values (ex: You advocate French-style secularism? Rot in hell, you @$£*& Jacobin!); and 2) showing their support for this blog (even though they mostly don't agree with the content).

To all my readers (present and potential), welcome to the second version of my blog. I hope that you'll like the new orientation that the blog took. Who knows? Maybe a movie review of mine has the potential to make you react more or less the same way some of my political views do ;-)